On 06/15/2014 04:34 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
> Em 15-06-2014 10:45, Pierre Labastie escreveu:
>> Le 15/06/2014 15:06, ALZ (phyglos.org) a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>>>> The sudo page in BLFS says:
>>>>>> "If you've built Sudo with PAM support, issue the following command..."
>>>> Sudo builds perfectly without pam.
>> Earlier, I thought to reply to this, but always came up with too long or
> too short replis, and gave up.
>
I've tested a few combinations of LFS new builds, either with Linux-PAM
or without Linux-PAM installed, installing sudo later.
sudo's ./configure effectively takes care of disabling --with-pam in a
LFS system when no Linux-PAM is installed, regardless you included the
switch or it was taken by default.
>> I agree that the wording on the page is
>> misleading. Maybe something like:
>> "If PAM is installed on the system, sudo is built with PAM support. In that
>> case, issue the following command."
>> Note that the command may as well be issued without PAM support. It just
>> creates a file, which is not used.
>> I like this form. Please, if you don't mind, do it.
I've found a rare case, in LFS with Linux-PAM installed but libraries
manually uninstalled, where sudo's ./configure complains and stops the
build, explicitly asking you for a --without-pam switch to be added.
So if you ever need "sudo without PAM" in a LFS system "with Linux-PAM"
installed, you should explicitly add --without-pam switch.
I think I got the complete picture now. Thank you!
ALZ.